Reread the quote in the article. Your quote is not accurate. Fr. Groeschel is not quoted as referencing the pervert as anything but a "poor priest". He certainly did not refer to him as a "good man" but rather as a "sick man." Who can disagree? However criminal or sinful, that priest/pervert's behavior is certainly sick.

And a tip of the antlers to you, sir, for discovering and exposing the real root of this article: the zealous hatred of the Roman Catholic Church by the "gays" and lesbians and specifically by Mr. or Ms. Brooks Egerton in his/her/its capacity as chairman of the Texas Chapter of the National Gay and Lesbian Journalists. Do members of his/her/its group implicitly tell the lies necessary to the support of their perversions as a condition of membership?

Your argument relies rather ridiculously on the premise of "the author is a fag, we won't believe him". What are you going to do when you embarrassedly realize that the facts stated were correct? Just how will you spin that one?

I am going to point out that in the past few months, the uber Catholics of FR have pretty much destroyed a previously thriving and pleasant Catholic Caucus that had a lot of participants and several non-Catholic defenders. Think about it - how many Catholics want to post and hear the endless screams of "you're not Catholic enough" from those of you who are more theologically pure than the Curia? Already, only a handful of you post in order to pat one another on the back, you are occasionally joined by a very few SSPX folks, and sinkspur is about the only person on here who has the wit and the patience to put up with this nonsense on a routine basis.

You want to know why your Church is in crisis? Look in a mirror, and ask yourself how you treat all around you.

106
posted on 03/03/2003 10:51:17 AM PST
by Chancellor Palpatine
(those who unilaterally beat their swords into plowshares wind up plowing for those who don't)

In other words, you won't address the fact that average, everyday Catholics no longer feel comfortable posting to Catholic threads here on FR. I'm saying that it is directly related to the scorn, derision and moral condecension heaped by your merry little band upon any of those who dare to differ from your stern theological line - especially as evidenced by your reaction to this article.

111
posted on 03/03/2003 11:04:13 AM PST
by Chancellor Palpatine
(those who unilaterally beat their swords into plowshares wind up plowing for those who don't)

I'm offering this up as someone who just read a nasty and shameful treatment of a poster and a topic. You are the one who should be most embarrassed of all, because you were nastiest, and I can say I find your invocation of a prayer in tagline to be the grossest display of pharisaic hypocrisy I've ever seen on this board.

112
posted on 03/03/2003 11:08:57 AM PST
by Chancellor Palpatine
(those who unilaterally beat their swords into plowshares wind up plowing for those who don't)

All one needs do is review Chancellor Palpitine's posts for the last several months to see that 1) he is a recent convert to Orthodoxy, 2) he is frequently engaged in discussions of legal issues/law cases, and uses language familiar to the legal profession (not medicine, as he has claimed to me to be in the med field) 3) he frequently discusses/criticizes the red-neck culture of his southern state and surrounding states (to the complete abscence of any comments about his earlier supposed location of Alaska, which he has since changed to "USA") 4) he is still obsessed with posting Catholic clergy scandal stories, and uses exactly the same phrases in his screeds, 5) he is still obsessed with anti-Catholic views that have no roots in reality, and 6) he pings the same anti-Catholics to threads now as he did under the OPH screen name, 7) he attacks the same Catholic FReepers as he did under the OPH screen name, 8) he makes the same anti-pro-lifer comments as he did under the OPH screen name, and 9) he makes the same inane statements about my own profession as he did under the OPH screen name.

The gigs up, MarMena. It doesn't take a rocket scientist.

I also know that regardless of his abuse victimhood, there is simply no excuse for CP/OPH's behavior, willful deceptions, and slanders on this forum.

Again, I have seen you post too many bogus anti-Catholic statements to trust that you would not help hide OPH's identity. Dishonesty is usually habitual.

When a poster habitually slanders an entire faith and all its adherents, then leaves the forum, only to be replaced by another poster using the same one-trick-pony bigotry, its not a bad idea to figure out why.

Especially when that poster's objectivity, and thus veracity, is compromised by extensive subjective involvement in the issue under debate.

Sink,

I stand by my assertion. OPH has obviously decided that now that he is "anonymous" using this new screen name, he can insult any Catholic he damn well pleases.

Just how many Kentucky (?)-lawyer-convert-to-Orthodoxy-anti-Catholic-sex-scandal-obsessed Americans do you think live in this country?

And of those few, how many do you think FREep?

Its OPH till proven otherwise Sink.

Sorry your old buddy OPH has decided to screw you too. You are Catholic, and under his new screen name, you're fair game.

Is OPH taking the naked cruise or the naked flight? He posted a personal journal on these threads a couple of years ago about the nudist cruise vacation he took with his wife. It was bizarre. That completely framed his every post against the church, for me, from that day forward. One Particular Harbor couldn't overcome his own particular guilt, or lack thereof, and the Church's unyielding official standard of morality was a bit nettlesome for him. He had a fascination with porn and stripping and defending Orthdoxy over Catholicism. Well, MarMema, you keep company with him? I am not surprised. Paging Chancellor Palpatine-be sure to always carry sunblock. V's wife.

I don't know about that, I just know he went on this wacky trip and his wife went and everybody was standing around on board the cruise sipping cocktails in their birthday suits, and I found the whole thing bizarre. Especially since he was also fond of talking up the benefits of strip clubs and massage parlors. While also talking down the Church. Actually, on a lot of other posts he was a funny, informed guy who sounded like a pretty good lawyer. I just always thought his fixation on porn stuff and strippers and particularly his cruise, seemed a little odd, especially after he set himself up to tackle the sins of Church. I also find it and found it odd with him, that the position so many non Catholic's take is that we loyal Catholics in any way excuse pervert priests: nobody does! Nor does anyone to my knowledge excuse negligent hierarchs. We may be greived, but we don't excuse. It seems like a convenient way for people who already hate Catholicism to vent. And they expect us to throw the baby out with the bathwater. We have a problem, we are talking about it. In recognizing it, it seems silly for them to expect us to leave the Church. I didn't leave the USA when Bill Clinton was President, I did start freeping a lot. Anyway, in all things charity. I wish there were more charity between non-C's and C's. Similarly, between Orthodox C's and the more mainstream. I like reading what you, or American Colleen or Ultima and Sinkspur have to say. I find others in the Protestant camp informative. I only wish we could explain our differences and yet maintain charity towards each other. V's wife.

he went on this wacky trip and his wife went and everybody was standing around on board the cruise sipping cocktails in their birthday suits, and I found the whole thing bizarre. Especially since he was also fond of talking up the benefits of strip clubs and massage parlors. While also talking down the Church.

...his fixation on porn stuff and strippers and particularly his cruise, seemed a little odd, especially after he set himself up to tackle the sins of Church.

average, everyday Catholics no longer feel comfortable posting to Catholic threads here on FR...directly related to the scorn, derision and moral condecension heaped by your merry little band upon any of those who dare to differ from your stern theological line

Address your responsibility for what you've done to the Catholic Caucus.

Let the Catholic Caucus address it.

Catholic Caucus,

I'm also pinging the approximately 80 Catholics on my ping list. If I have sinned against you, mea culpa.

(If I have not, please join me in politely telling Chancellor Palpatine --otherwise known as One_Particular_Harbour-- to get lost ;-)

Why don't you stop harrassing this poor priest? He is a sick man. You are wrong for what you are doing to him.

I doubt whether Fr. Groeschel said exactly what is quoted and remember we do not know how long they talked and what Mr. Serrano was doing to "harrass". But for the sake of the argument say the quote is accurate.

What would our opinion of Father be,if as a priest and/or confessor and/or psychologist he had said,"It's healthy to continue harrassing this poor priest. He is a sick man and you are right in doing what you're doing to him"?

After all "Vengeance is mine said the Lord". And,in the natural world as well as the supernatural,at a certain livel of understanding everyone agrees that is futile and self defeating to carry hate,anger and venom on the journey home.

And I say this while not a particular fan of Father G.,who is too saintly,gentle and kind to be my cup of tea. However,I think the writer of the article is a person with an agenda,and that agenda does not call for finding that an active homosexual clergy is for the most part responsible for the current scandal.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.